ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2020
Outcomes of patients with pelvic leiomyosarcoma treated by surgery and relevant auxiliary diagnosis.
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary Ovarian Leiomyosarcoma Is a Very Rare Entity: A Narrative Review of the Literature.Cancers · 2023Review
- Stage IV uterine leiomyosarcoma resection: A case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLeiomyosarcoma is a subtype of soft tissue sarcoma with adverse outcomes. Leiomyosarcoma accounts for nearly 70% of all uterine sarcomas and is responsible for a considerable proportion of deaths because of uterine cancer. Clinical characteristics and relevant diagnosis of pelvic leiomyosarcoma should be further explored.
aimTo identify the outcome and relevant perioperative evaluation of patients with pelvic leiomyosarcoma.
methodsThe Kaplan-Meier method was used to determine progression-free survival and overall survival rates. Factors predictive of outcomes were identified using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsFifty-one patients with pelvic leiomyosarcoma were enrolled and divided into two groups including uterine leiomyosarcoma and non-uterine leiomyosarcoma. Overall, 28.6% and 45.5% of uterine leiomyosarcoma and non-uterine leiomyosarcoma patients, respectively, had elevated carbohydrate antigen 125 levels, whereas 45.7% and 68.8%, respectively, underwent ultrasonography. Although 68.8% of uterine leiomyosarcoma patients were initially diagnosed with hysteromyoma, 72.7% of non-uterine leiomyosarcoma patients had pelvic and abdominal masses. Moreover, 93.3% of the recurrent lesions were detected using ultrasonography. Patients with International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages III-IV disease had poorer progression-free survival values than those with FIGO stages I-II (
conclusionSerum tumour biomarkers cannot be used for pelvic leiomyosarcoma diagnosis. FIGO stage is critical to predict the outcome of uterine leiomyosarcoma. Ultrasonography is more reliable for postoperative follow-up than preoperative diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.